Talk:Chicago Blackhawks name and logo controversy

Starting new page
I am reducing the bloat in Native American mascot controversy in preparation for a GA review, so this is a split of the section on the Blackhawks in that article, starting with a cut and paste. Of course this omits the supporting content that a stand-alone article needs, but will add later. I am always surprised by the immediacy with which new articles are reviewed and tagged (< 45 minutes in this case), while I cannot stimulate any interest in the older articles that need attention.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 02:29, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion
I do not understand the reason given by User:Blackguard SF; this article is one of several creating by splitting content from Native American mascot controversy in accordance with the application of WP:Summary style during a GA review, which the main article passed. Deleting this article would mean restoring the content that only exists here to the main article. The balance of content between related articles may be reason for further editing, but a deletion is unwarranted.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 03:28, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * How much of this isn't copied from another Wikipedia article? Blackguard  06:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * All may have been copied, that is what "splitting" means. Are you saying when an article becomes too large it cannot be split?--WriterArtistDC (talk) 13:33, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The whole point of WP:SPLIT is to avoid long articles and to refactor an article to be discussed more fully elsewhere. It was not a cut and paste, as you said above, but a copy and paste, which neither refactors nor solves anything. The fact that Native American mascot controversy passed GA shows the article didn't need saving anyway. Blackguard  18:47, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Since a third party agrees that this was a properly created split, and removed the PROD, I have nothing more to say.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 01:40, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Tonally challenged facebook quotation
I've just removed the following passage from the main article, and placed it here for consideration.

The Chi-Nations Youth Council (CNYC), an Indigenous youth organization in Chicago, said in 2020, "The Chicago Blackhawks name and logo symbolizes a legacy of imperialism and genocide." "As statues of invaders, slave holders, and white supremacists fall across the nation so too should the images and language of the savage and dead 'Indians'." CNYC also noted "As social consciousness has grown over the past decades so has the Blackhawks performative gestures of buying their reprieve from those willing to sell out the health and humanity of our future generations."

I don't think the bolded sentence above (my bold) meets the tonal standard of Wikipedia (mild opinion), but I left it alone until I noticed a broken citation in the citation section, and guess what? it was my old friend above.

I was merely going to hold my nose and trim the URL character spam when I noticed that the host domain was facebook.com.

Three strikes.

Now it's quarantined here for a community verdict. &mdash; MaxEnt 00:10, 6 May 2021 (UTC)


 * The Chi-Nations Youth Council's opposition to the Blackhawks' name and logo is notable and most definitely has a place in this article. They are an Indigenous advocacy group that has worked on this. A Chicago Tribune editorial to change the name cited both the American Indian Center of Chicago and the Chi-Nations Youth Council's opposition. The language used represents CNYC's position and should not be censored. I'm restoring the edit. However, I'll use their website as a citation instead of the Facebook citation. -TenorTwelve (talk) 08:11, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Summary style
Per Summary style, for a topic with so many local manifestations, the main article should contain all the general content shared by the related articles. Addressing the tag re: lead size here, I have begun to summarize content fully covered in the main article. This article should mainly be about the Blackwawks. WriterArtistDC (talk) 20:40, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Summary style reconsidered
The main article was getting so large that it seems necessary to move at much detail as possible to articles on particular teams. WriterArtistDC (talk) 21:01, 16 April 2023 (UTC)